Gone with the wind: Individual differences in heuristics and biases undermine the implication of systematic irrationality
Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):673-674 (2000)
|Abstract||The target article's finding of stable and general individual differences in solving of problems in heuristics-and-biases experiments is fundamentally subversive to the Meliorist research program's attention-getting claim that human thought is “systematically irrational.” Since some people get these problems right, studies of heuristics and biases may reduce to repeated demonstrations that difficult questions are hard to solve.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Cass R. Sunstein (2005). Moral Heuristics. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (4):531-542.
Daniel Kahneman, Paul Slovic & Amos Tversky (eds.) (1982). Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge University Press.
Thomas Sturm (2012). The “Rationality Wars” in Psychology: Where They Are and Where They Could Go. Inquiry 55 (1):66-81.
Keith E. Stanovich & Richard F. West (2000). Individual Differences in Reasoning: Implications for the Rationality Debate? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (5):645-665.
Mark Alfano (2011). Explaining Away Intuitions About Traits: Why Virtue Ethics Seems Plausible (Even If It Isn't). Review of Philosophy and Psychology 2 (1):121-136.
Yechiel Klar & Uzi Levi (2004). Not Just a Passion for Negativity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (3):349-349.
Andrea Polonioli (2012). Gigerenzer's 'External Validity Argument' Against the Heuristics and Biases Program: An Assessment. [REVIEW] Mind and Society 11 (2):133-148.
Ralph Hertwig & Annika Wallin (2004). Out of the Theoretical Cul-de-Sac. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (3):342-343.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads6 ( #154,770 of 722,935 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,087 of 722,935 )
How can I increase my downloads?